The Spender-in-Chief’s Fiscal Freeze Follies

· Wednesday, January 27, 2010

There are more loopholes in President Obama’s proposed “spending freeze” than in an Olympic volleyball net. Gargantuan government entitlements (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) are exempt. A half-trillion in unspent stimulus money is exempt. Foreign aid is exempt. The Democrats’ proposed $154 billion jobs bill (Stimulus II) is exempt.

Pet federal education programs will be exempt (including $4 billion for the White House “Race to the Top” standards initiative and an additional $1.35 billion he just requested in the 2011 budget). Green jobs spending will be exempt. (Obama proposed $10 billion in new clean energy spending earlier this month.) Electorally driven tax-credit expansions will be exempt. The health care takeover plan is not included. As even The New York Times reported, the “estimated $250 billion in savings over 10 years would be less than 3 percent of the roughly $9 trillion in additional deficits the government is expected to accumulate over that time.”

Which amounts to a molecule in a drop of the ocean of red ink in which American taxpayers have been drowning.

The current Spender-in-Chief unveiled details of this lofty new work of political fiction on Monday with more fanfare than a new “Twilight” title. It was supposed to be the centerpiece of the State of the Union address. But by Tuesday morning, Obama’s illusion of fiscal discipline had been shredded left, right and center. By Tuesday afternoon, irritated White House spokesman Robert Gibbs was already downplaying the gimmickry. It’s just something Obama will “mention,” Gibbs bristled.

After campaign videos of Obama repeatedly deriding “hatchet”-wielding spending freezes spread like Kudzu across the Internet, official White House blogger Jared Bernstein tried to control the widespread hypocrisy charges:

“During the campaign, you may recall that John McCain touted option 1 -- the hatchet approach of an across-the-board freeze.

“The President was critical of that approach then, and we would be critical of it now. It’s not what we’re proposing. To the contrary, the entire theory of the President’s proposed freeze is to dial up the stuff that will support job growth and innovation while dialing down the stuff that doesn’t. Under our plan, some discretionary spending will go up; some will go down. That’s a big difference from a hatchet. …

“President Obama deeply understands the various imperatives of this moment in time, even if they don’t always point in the same direction.”

So, he had a hatchet on Monday when he wanted headlines praising his return to austerity in the wake of the GOP’s Massachusetts Senate victory; a scalpel on Tuesday when he needed to mollify the big-government left. What will he wield at the State of the Union address on Wednesday night? A variable-speed Dremel rotary tool?

Some conservative Beltway analysts are cheering Obama’s fiscal freeze follies as a step in the right direction, a rhetorical victory and a “good start.” Pardon me for not joining in the standing ovation for the latest performance of White House kabuki theater. Praising the president for carrying on the charade of budget reform because a few piddling cuts are real is like complimenting the Naked Emperor’s fingernails: So he didn't have any clothes. At least his cuticles were real. It’s a start!

Moreover, who believes this freeze will last for the entire, cynically timed three-year period that the White House announced fewer than 72 hours ago? McDonald’s French fries have a longer shelf life than Obama’s pledges of fiscal accountability. All it’ll take is one more bad jobs report, one Chicken Little Congress-induced panic, to drop the budget restrictions faster than reality dad Jon Gosselin’s ex-girlfriends.

One year after riding into town on a wave of adulation and ambition, Obama has lost his “swagga.” His pre-State of the Union appearances have been listless and perfunctory. His dependence on a teleprompter -- even for a standard 6-minute stump statement at an elementary school -- is now the butt of universal mockery. And his political machine has been forced to lay down enough fake Astroturf support to cover a football field.

This is the time to nail the phonies in the White House, not to beg for meetings in hopes of bipartisan problem-solving. There’s little triumph in Obama’s empty “concessions” on the need to cut spending. They are fueled not by sincere commitment to reining in Washington’s appetites, but by craven political self-preservation.

The president has lately regressed into his “I will fight for you” campaign sloganeering -- by which, of course, he means, “I will fight for me.” There will be no hands reaching across the aisle. Obama’s too busy using them to point fingers at everyone else for his own political meltdown.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM


Third-party content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Patriot Post.


Comments

Brian Gordon

Michelle - I really enjoy your comments and this article rings so true. My only comment though is that the toxic touch of our President continues. Just after a call of support to John Calipari the head coach of the UK Wildcats and the #1 basketball team in the country - they lost to South Carolina a few hours later. When you add up the Dems loss in Virginia, New Jersey, Massachusetts and now Kentucky's loss to South Carolina it makes the POTUS 0-4. I wish he would stick to politics and not meddle in yet another area that he has little expertise.

Posted January 27, 2010 at 7:59:09 AM


g. wegmann

The problem with Obama's statement that he will fight for you is that he will fight the deficit and excess Federal spending like a man who brings a butter knife to a knife fight!

But when it comes to Unions and the Leftist supporters of Obama he will fight the rest of US with a with every weapon in the Community Organizers bag!

Posted January 27, 2010 at 8:42:10 AM


Frank E.Waterstraat

01/28/10

The formost reason the CHIEF ACDEMICIAN SHYSTER

bad mouthed the SUPREME COURT JURISTS,During the

state of the union speech.For repeal of forbidding

CORPORATE DONATIONS to individuals campaigning for

elections,That might help an OPPONENT of a UNION

SPONSORED campaigner.

Posted January 28, 2010 at 7:00:12 PM


PatriotNana

M.O.M. for America is hosting a post rally event after the Restoring Honor Rally on August 28, 2010 in DC, with Michelle Malkin as guest speaker. Check it out you might want to join us for the evening. www.mom4america.ning.com

Posted January 29, 2010 at 2:13:46 PM


Smedley P. Forsyth

I've heard these remarks from the mouths of so many politicians that yours doesn't add one more note of validity. I think that most of the citizens of this country that have been manipulated and misled by wallstreet, Washington politicians, State politicians, insurance companies, investment banks and mortgage banks, oppressive taxes at state and national levels from the past 40 years to as far as the eye can see, are totally washed out with the rhetoric you espouse. I'm relatively apolitical, perhaps a good quality, and I do not contribute to political parties, nor candidates. I think their party, the people who want something out of them or our governing bodies at all levels do more than their share to fill those needs. Hopefully, through some miracle of good judgment, however, it is my fond hope that this mess will change. It will take much longer with the level of embellished, inaccurate and slanted articles that come from articles that don't tell the whold story, as well from the mouths of our elected leaders. That effort has made millions of dollars for the most effective of you, so I guess that might be the big incentive. Simply stated, a large number of us don't believe it anymore. It is not true that all of the citizens of this country will continue to believe the negative comments and stonewalling efforts that come from the far right voices of conservative reason. Neither do I care for the far left efforts to over expand government programs beyond their need, excessive spending, mostly for undeclared wars, its industry and "pork." I think the Republican Party did enough of that trying to keep the Contract With America. That was a bust, huh? I do hope for some centrist reason that realizes that there are over 300 million of us out here (probably 350 million if we could count all the illegal Mexicans, South Americans, Asians, and Muslims that have penetrated our country looking for that opportunity to make some reasonable living for themselves and their family). And, we strongly hope for some relief from a government that refuses to listen, and will protect our great need to make a future for ourselves and family without losing our right to work in markets that we have supported for most of our lives. Somehow, I continue to doubt that these immigrant's governments have ever given them the opportunities they receive here. My God, Michelle, even giving them Social Security with all of it's commitment and financial difficulties? Citizenship aquired by a majority of them is a willingness to provide cheap labor or by (multiple) births. And there is too much of that out there. Add that to your list of ill spent dollars by a so called "Socialist" government.

It is my hope that the next three years will provide a stumulus to both the right and left to come to their senses, stop being the world's police force, get the heck out of the Arab nations, (whose oil is the only major commitment requiring us to be there, not the WMD excuse), take care of our own infrastructure, both financially and structurally. Stop the constant, daily rhetoric aimed at winning the MONEY and POWER drive for control of the treasury, the minds and lives of the millions that support this country with their lives, their tax dollars, and their spirit. We need both the conservative and the progressive in government, but most of all we need them both to balance their efforts to govern effectively for all of us. It could start with you. Unfortunately, You just don't appear to me to be "fair and balanced," with most of your writings and comments made on media appearances. But then, it was Sir Roger of Fox News that said he was "all about ratings." Maybe that is what you are all about. This doesn't fit with our real need for, and our effort to receive some semblance of the truth, and won't unless we dig for it. Think about it. "Fair and Balanced?????" After looking at most of the postings you receive, I see nothing but petty and vitriotic comments. What a pity that this seems to be the path of current reason. Maybe there is truth in the saying that we are just a flock of sheep following the will of Congress!!!!! What a pity.

Posted February 2, 2010 at 1:36:29 PM


Post a Comment

Please keep comments civil and brief. Obscene, profane, abusive and off-topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked.

(required, displayed)
(required, not displayed)
Facebook Twitter YouTube RSS Connect with The Patriot Post






Our Mission

To Support and Defend -- Read The Patriot Post -- It's Right. It's Free. -- www.patriotpost.us

"The Patriot's mission is to advocate for Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and to promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. Our objective is to provide Patriots across our nation with a touchstone of First Principles through brief, informative and entertaining analyses of relevant news, policy and opinion from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations, so they may better support and defend those Principles, and enlist others to join our ranks." —Mark Alexander, Publisher


The Patriot Post is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!

Support The 2012 Patriot Fund